THIS is Texas? 6º F
- Thread starter RTexasF
- Start date
As I read through most of this thread, it boiled down to a lot of what I assumed I would read and from the mostly the usual cast of suspects.
Basic things to consider here are that there have been cold weather capacity problems in the ERCOT system at three points in the not so recent past - December of 1989, February of 2011, and this recent event. Reports full of recommendations came out from the 1989 and 2011 events, and unsurprisingly, the recommendations were pretty much the same, and likely will be same as what comes out of this event.
Key differences to note are that in 1989, the market had not yet been deregulated. Since then, it has, making the cost of generation the only real thing matters in the market - not reliability, not resiliency to extremes, etc... In a market like that, justifying making improvements for these quote "rare" events (now three times in the last 31 years with varying results) is exceedingly tough. If you are a wind producer, and the cold weather add ons we use in the North that allow wind generation down into the -20 degree F range add to that cost to produce, would you willingly spend the money on it if you are required to? If you are a natural gas generator or a nuclear generator, does spending the money for these three events make sense? Probably not to the producer.
And yes, wind is a larger player in this event as opposed to the last two events. However, the same issues that plagued thermal producers in those two events, reared their heads again. Is the need for more thermal producers like gas facilities greater with wind generation? Undoubtedly yes. Does it appear they learned from past failures? Not particularly...
While the system did not fail to the extent it did this time around, having three events of this nature is just over 30 years doesn't point to it being a one in a million type scenario. I look at what we've already had to modify in my profession - storm water. The storms I use in the design side are 20+% larger than what they were when I started my career. That comes out of the statistics - whats already happened in the past years. Call it what you want, debate the sources of changes all you want, but there are changes in the trends of weather. When it comes to the infrastructure that society depends on (and honestly society generally doesn't think about until bad stuff happens like this) one may ask themselves if this is really a one time event or something that is going to keep happening. 3 times in 31 years should be a hint...
I would point out in a cold snap a few years ago, the wind energy predictions overestimated the amount of wind energy that would be available as they did not completely understand the cutoff point of the cold weather gear wind power in this area can handle. For this area, that was around -22 F as the temp that wind just went off line to protect the infrastructure. That has since been built into the forecasting and modeling of predicted output. Even cold weather areas get some of this wrong from time to time. Would be interesting if ERCOT had this in their projections (at the correct temps their non-cold weather equipped gear runs in) correctly as well...
Basic things to consider here are that there have been cold weather capacity problems in the ERCOT system at three points in the not so recent past - December of 1989, February of 2011, and this recent event. Reports full of recommendations came out from the 1989 and 2011 events, and unsurprisingly, the recommendations were pretty much the same, and likely will be same as what comes out of this event.
Key differences to note are that in 1989, the market had not yet been deregulated. Since then, it has, making the cost of generation the only real thing matters in the market - not reliability, not resiliency to extremes, etc... In a market like that, justifying making improvements for these quote "rare" events (now three times in the last 31 years with varying results) is exceedingly tough. If you are a wind producer, and the cold weather add ons we use in the North that allow wind generation down into the -20 degree F range add to that cost to produce, would you willingly spend the money on it if you are required to? If you are a natural gas generator or a nuclear generator, does spending the money for these three events make sense? Probably not to the producer.
And yes, wind is a larger player in this event as opposed to the last two events. However, the same issues that plagued thermal producers in those two events, reared their heads again. Is the need for more thermal producers like gas facilities greater with wind generation? Undoubtedly yes. Does it appear they learned from past failures? Not particularly...
While the system did not fail to the extent it did this time around, having three events of this nature is just over 30 years doesn't point to it being a one in a million type scenario. I look at what we've already had to modify in my profession - storm water. The storms I use in the design side are 20+% larger than what they were when I started my career. That comes out of the statistics - whats already happened in the past years. Call it what you want, debate the sources of changes all you want, but there are changes in the trends of weather. When it comes to the infrastructure that society depends on (and honestly society generally doesn't think about until bad stuff happens like this) one may ask themselves if this is really a one time event or something that is going to keep happening. 3 times in 31 years should be a hint...
I would point out in a cold snap a few years ago, the wind energy predictions overestimated the amount of wind energy that would be available as they did not completely understand the cutoff point of the cold weather gear wind power in this area can handle. For this area, that was around -22 F as the temp that wind just went off line to protect the infrastructure. That has since been built into the forecasting and modeling of predicted output. Even cold weather areas get some of this wrong from time to time. Would be interesting if ERCOT had this in their projections (at the correct temps their non-cold weather equipped gear runs in) correctly as well...
My uncles used to own a logging company and there were foresters involved when the logging would take place. Historically the forests were much " thinner: because when there was a forest fire the only thing that put out the forest fires in when what ever caused it to burn out.
Last edited:
It amazes me how hysterical people are about a few days of intermittent power interruption in parts of Texas, but I hear nothing but silence about California's repetitive blackouts, year in and year out. Why are people, many not in Texas and some not in the USA, in full blown PANIC mode?
Why is there a mass exodus from California? That's a real crisis.
https://www.latimes.com/california/...tensifying-retirees-musicians-teachers-actors
If Texas is 'SOOOO BAAADD" like everyone seems to be saying now, why does everyone want to move here?
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Excellent post.
On your last point, that's exactly what happened. While anticipated average output for wind was already low (~25% nameplate), actual output during the 15th was about 50% that due, primarily, to the issues mentioned. Wind failing to meet predicted output (or, on the flip side, surpassing predictions) isn't unusual, that's why there's a fudge factor and standby capacity in place but that standby capacity couldn't deliver.
Even if the wind turbines were properly weatherproofed it wouldn't have changed the gas requirements. While average output would have been closer to predicted, the wind output swings, which are completely normal, still necessitates full-nameplate standby capacity. This morning for example, wind output was nowhere near forecast:
www.ercot.com/content/cdr/html/CURRENT_DAYCOP_HSL.html?uniquenessFactor=1613920135891
(that link is live data, so the content changes)
I've selected Short Term Wind Power Forecast, which shows that both day-ahead and the most recent forecasts both over-estimated wind output in the early hours of today by around 10,000MW, but they were expecting it to decline as the sun came up:
Are you suggesting 2 wrongs make a right?
Agreed; not entirely. No one said entirely.
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
I will say you guys need to study the fire triangle and see which of the 3 you can interrupt
There was an amazing interview on Fox News Sunday AM. The reporter was questioning Michael Burgess, House Energy and Commence Committee. The reporter was "Why didn't Texas have back up plans for cold weather?" Mr. Burgess replied In 2011, then TX Gov. Rick Perry tried to do exactly that. He attempted to approve several energy plants FOR REDUNDANCY after a hard cold spell, but the inner city mayors and environmentalists railed against it and it was shot down. Go figure.
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Saw that … mayors across all states have to be onboard for things to fly ~ for example STP nuclear plant feeds the major cities below Dallas …
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Sorry for the somewhat OT, but we are grappling with the idiocy that is the energy illiterate citiot here in Ontario. We simultaneously have the same group of people celebrating the impending loss of Pickering nuclear, which provides the majority of the power for Toronto, while rallying to eliminate gas generation. Gas is slated to go up dramatically when Pickering closes (by ~3,100MW) but these people refuse to see that the two prongs of this forked ideology are at odds with each other. They need to choose a goal but trying to have that conversation with them? Impossible.
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Oh Toronto weather! … we spent 5 hours circling deicing so when the blizzard cleared the planes went airborne 1-2-3 ………………………… This for a 3-1/2 hour fight !
Now, only 3 of us in the front … so we had our share of deicing !
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Pearson? I assume so and not the island. What a crazy place.
Some of the stuff you hear from people just boggles the mind. I had one guy tell me a couple of years ago that Niagara falls produces half of Ontario's electricity. I'm not kidding. Energy illiteracy is a massive problem, particularly now that we have this electrification push.
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Lester B is YYZ
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Did not see the gens there … saw some beat up barrels at the IMAX theater
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Hmm... was just saw a tweet saying that the EPA refused to allow Texas to run all of their operational power plants at 100% output during the crisis and that there was 110% of capacity available to meet the demand except for the standing federal limits.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Yessir … some long walks much like FRA
Similar threads
